I seem to remember that there is a Lincoln Law School in San Jose (and maybe Sacramento?) which is California state bar accredited, and another with a very similar name which is not accredited. Which one is this?

I have no personal experience with ALUSL, so I can't speak as to the education it offers. I would, however, advise you to really think about the fact that this law school does not have either ABA of CBE (California state) accreditation. That doesn't mean it's a bad school, or that you can't get a good legal education there, but it does mean that you'll have limitations placed on your ability to practice in other states. It also means that that your degree will be viewed very differently by a lot of employers, and not in a good way.

Generally, I'm not one of those people who says "Oh my god, you're not going to (insert name of random T1)! You'll never get a job!" I've met enough lawyers from all tiers to know that that's not necessarily true. However, graduating from an unaccredited law school does present some pretty big challenges and you should be totally aware of these before committing yourself to four years and tens of thousands of dollars.

1) You'll have to take the First Year Law Students Exam (the "Baby Bar") at the end of your first year. ALUSL's pass rates are pretty low, for both first and repeat takers. Check the Calbar website. That doesn't necesarily mean tha the education offered at ALUSL is inferior, or that you can't be one of the few who passes, but it isn't meaningless either. It's something to note and to ask ALUSL about.

2) The bar pass rates are equally troubling, in my opinion. Again, it doesn't mean you can't do it, but it's legitimate to ask why are these numbers so low? I'm not talking about the 50-60% that some CA T4s have, I'm talking under 10%. Check the Calbar website.

3) You will not be able to practice in many states. Some will let you apply after a certain amount of time spent practicing in CA, others won't. ALUSL's website says that theeir degree may not qualify you to take the bar in a particular state, and you should check to be sure. Fair enough, but I think unaccredited schools should be absolutely clear and offer full, frank disclosure on this issue. The majority of states will not admit you, period.

4) CHEA and DETC accreditation are fine, but don't mean anything in the law school context. ABA and (to a lesser extent) CBE are the only forms of accreditation that matter. CHEA and DETC do not help you qualify for practice outside of CA.

5) When it comes to getting a job, you may very well be entirely on your own. My undertsanding is that most correspondance schools offer little or no career services. This may not be an issue with you. You may want to go into solo practice and be your own boss or you may already have a job lined up. If you plan on solo practice, spend some time looking into that option first. It's very difficult straight out of law school.

Bottom line, I think a school like ALUSL can be a good choice for the right student, but I think most people are not that student. Think hard about whether or not you are.

I attend Lincoln Law School of Sacramento, which has only CBE accreditation. Having already established a solid career that I do not intend to abandon after I graduate, attending a state-accredited school makes sense because what I will be doing after I pass the bar won't depend upon the prestige of my J.D. That said, if I had gone to an ABA school, even more doors might have opened up in my career that will otherwise remain closed. However, just getting the license will vault me far above my lay colleagues and position me to do bigger and better things. If you can say that, then maybe a non-accredited school would serve your purposes. But Roald is right about the pass rates. I know people who have had to take the baby bar — their success rate is dismal. The pass rate is typically only 20 percent. There are contributing factors to the low percentage. For example, some of the students who have to take it were those who could not pass ordinary first-year law school exams. If you cannot pass a simple crim law final, you're going to struggle with the FYLSE. Some say that the baby bar is particularly difficult. I don't believe this is true. The fact patterns that I've seen from it are ordinary tort and contract problems, which any average law student should be able to pass with ease. But the statistics don't lie. Bar and baby bar pass rates for those who study at non-accredited schools speak for themselves. Even brick and mortar CBE schools like mine grapple with bar pass rates. I've heard that the percentage of CBE graduates who ever manage to pass the bar hovers around 70 percent. I've met people who have failed the bar five times or more. That's got to be devastating. Think carefully about what you're doing and what your goals are before choosing a school.

A key reason why most FYLSE test takers fail the exam is because they are fooled into thinking that they can absorb a huge amount of information in one year by studying on a part time basis. The amount of information you need to know to pass takes at least 8 hours a day for the entire year. The assignments the school gives only scratches the surface of what the student needs to know. There is nothing wrong with the online law school student. There is something wrong with the way the whole online law school program is structured. Let's stop blaming the victim.

A key reason why most FYLSE test takers fail the exam is because they are fooled into thinking that they can absorb a huge amount of information in one year by studying on a part time basis. The amount of information you need to know to pass takes at least 8 hours a day for the entire year. The assignments the school gives only scratches the surface of what the student needs to know. There is nothing wrong with the online law school student. There is something wrong with the way the whole online law school program is structured. Let's stop blaming the victim.

Generally speaking, I agree. The model of legal education adopted by the the ABA and CBE schools, is, I think, the bare minimum that most people need in order to adequately prepare for the bar exam. Of course there are always examples of online students who pass the FYLSE and bar on their first attempts, but these numbers are very, very low. Personally, I don't think that there is any substitute for live classroom attendance and participation. I know that many people will disagree, but the statistics speak for themselves.

I've read a lot of commentary that attributes the low FYLSE/bar pass rates of online schools to the fact that online students are usually working full time, have families, etc. Well, students at ABA/CBE accredited part time evening programs are also working full time, have families, etc., and the bar pass rates are much, much higher. I believe that this discrepancy has to do less with the students, as you've said, and more to do with the format.

A key reason why most FYLSE test takers fail the exam is because they are fooled into thinking that they can absorb a huge amount of information in one year by studying on a part time basis. The amount of information you need to know to pass takes at least 8 hours a day for the entire year. The assignments the school gives only scratches the surface of what the student needs to know. There is nothing wrong with the online law school student. There is something wrong with the way the whole online law school program is structured. Let's stop blaming the victim.

Generally speaking, I agree. The model of legal education adopted by the the ABA and CBE schools, is, I think, the bare minimum that most people need in order to adequately prepare for the bar exam. Of course there are always examples of online students who pass the FYLSE and bar on their first attempts, but these numbers are very, very low. Personally, I don't think that there is any substitute for live classroom attendance and participation. I know that many people will disagree, but the statistics speak for themselves.

I've read a lot of commentary that attributes the low FYLSE/bar pass rates of online schools to the fact that online students are usually working full time, have families, etc. Well, students at ABA/CBE accredited part time evening programs are also working full time, have families, etc., and the bar pass rates are much, much higher. I believe that this discrepancy has to do less with the students, as you've said, and more to do with the format.

While I don't think LSAT scores and undergrad GPA are perfect indicators of intelligence and work ethic, I do think they are strongly correlated with intelligence and work ethic. If you took Yale's incoming class and put them through school at ALUSL, I imagine nearly all would pass the baby bar.

Generally speaking, if you score below a certain number on the LSAT you will struggle with law school and bar testing.

alu.edu states that only 10 out of 70 of their bar takers passed in june of 2011, and I imagine that result has more to do with student quality than quality of education. Law school tests and bar exams test a specific and narrow type of intelligence.

I think you're right on the money with the Yale comparison, but those people are superstars to begin with. What about the average student a T4 like Cal Western, for instance? Their incoming GPA/LSATs are relatively low, but the first time bar pass rate is something like 75-80%. Would those students pass at the same rate if they attended an online school? The question is probably unanswerable, but I have a suspicion that the low FYLSE/bar pass rates are the result of a combination of factors including both quality of students and quality of education.